Team Introduction. Stakeholder and Public Engagement. Importance of the US 280 Corridor. Project Overview, Schedule, and Deliverables.

Transcription

1 U.S. 280 Corridor Transit Study Birmingham MPO April 14, 2010 Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham Birmingham, Alabama Today s Briefing Team Introduction Stakeholder and Public Engagement Importance of the US 280 Corridor Project Overview, Schedule, and Deliverables Next Steps 1

2 RS&H Team Reynolds, Smith & Hills PBS&J Jordan, Jones, & Goulding Dynamic Civil Solutions* CE Associates* CALEB Marketing Solutions* Atlanta Birmingham Atlanta Birmingham Birmingham Birmingham Advanced Planning Technology Atlanta * Denotes DBE Firm Primary Project Stakeholders ALDOT Jefferson County Shelby County City of Birmingham City of Homewood City of Vestavia Hills City of Mountain Brook City of Westover City of Hoover City of Chelsea City of Harpersville Birmingham-Jefferson County Transit Authority Birmingham MPO 2

3 Meaningful Stakeholder and Public Engagement Project Stakeholder Committee Public Workshops Presentations to Local Governments Project Website and On-Line Surveys Project Fact Sheets Quick Facts Educational Element Importance of the US 280 Corridor 3

4 Bringing the Pieces Together Serves Regional and Local Needs Critical Connector to Downtown and Other Major Centers/Corridors Extreme Congestion in Commute Periods Narrow Right-of-Way in Some Places Rapid Suburbanization Need for Travel Options Putting All the Pieces Together is the Key. Visualizing the Corridor Today SUBURBAN URBAN TRANSITIONING RURAL 4

5 Potential Transportation Options Multimodal Focus Coordination with ALDOT s On-Going Activities Will Not Preclude Future Roadway Improvements Alternatives to be Studied No Build / Do Nothing Transportation System Management Build Alternatives Option Local Circulators Traditional Bus Commuter Coach Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit POTENTIAL CANDIDATE TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS Comments Can be used in downtowns, town centers, or activity centers (development nodes) For improved local bus service Has more rider amenities - used successfully in express bus services Tries to replicate rail service at a lower cost can be introduced as premium service to build public confidence and use Integrates well into urban environment more costly than buses used for main trunk line service A One Size Fits All Approach Will Not Work. Potential Land Use Alternatives Two Alternatives Implementation of Current Local Plans Compact, Transit-Oriented Development BirminghamMPOModel Close Coordination with Local Jurisdictions Review of Previous and Current Plans Detailed Modeling for Three Activity Centers or Transit Nodes 5

6 Travel Demand Modeling Will be Closely Coordinated with Long-Range Transportation Plan and Other Major Studies BirminghamMPOModel Will Need to Work With Shelby County to Address the Very Large Traffic Analysis Zones in the Rural Area Detailed Land Use Analysis Will Look at Future Transit Service and How it Relates and is Affected by Transportation Networks and Land Use Patterns Will Use Agreed Upon Evaluation Criteria Coordination with Stakeholders Clear Comparison of How Land Use Patterns Perform 6

7 Comparison of Transportation Alternatives Goals and Objectives Will Use Performance Measures to Compare the Alternatives Tied to Purpose and Need Statement Tailored Segment Plans Short-Term, Medium-Term, and Long-Term Options Environmental Coordination Coordination with the Federal Transit Administration Has Started Initial Approach Will be on a Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Will Be Able To Advance Corridor Segments to Project Development As They Are Needed Will Continue To Monitor New Transportation Reauthorization and Major Changes in FTA Process 7

8 Project Schedule Key Milestones Project Coordination Plan by March 2010 (complete) Data/GIS and Needs Analysis by July 2010 Transportation Scenarios by December 2010 Land Use Scenarios by December 2010 Evaluation of Alternatives by February 2011 Integrated Plan and Implementation Strategies by June 2011 Environmental Documentation to be determined Project Deliverables Project Coordination Plan Public Involvement Database and Schedule Public Involvement and Stakeholder Coordination Plan Project Fact Sheets Workshop Materials and Graphics Project Stakeholder Meeting Summaries Public Workshop Summaries FTA Meeting Summaries Project Visualizations Technical Memo Data Inventory Technical Memo Needs Analysis Technical Memo Proposed Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures Technical Memo Environmental Constraints Documentation Technical Memo Transportation and Land Use Scenario Definition Technical Memo Evaluation of Alternatives and Corridor Priorities Technical Memo U.S. 280 Corridor Transit Financial Element Technical Memo Integrated Transportation and Land Use Plan Memo of Agreement for the U.S. 280 Corridor Implementation Program Technical Memo FTA Project Management Plan Outline Executive Summary and Final Report Electronic Files of Project Documentation 8

9 THANK YOU FOR MORE INFORMATION: Mike Kaczorowski, PE Project Manager Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham Phone: (205)